GH2 driftwood hack in shootout with Canon C300

DrDave

I don't mind bringing the lights but the stair stepping is annoying. Besides, they have the tech now, so it is OK for us to ask for it.

Clermond

I am really wondering about judging the skin tones. First of all skin tones in Mr. Bloom's video by itself are horrible. Secondly in my eyes skin tones in the test are too much red / magenta? Am I the only one who is irritated?

I for myself cannot take serious a low light test lit by an open toilet door. This is a situation where I (hopefully) will never end up.

magnifico

here we should stop and focus in our breathing. Some words we have now in mind talking about the Philip Bloom Test : "absolutely nuts" and now "open toilet door test"...

brianluce

Don't be so quick to judge, a lot of Hollywood DP's have used open toilet doors to light feature films. It's a famous technique first used by Conrad Hall.

Ian_T

sigh

Stop saying the GH-2 is not so good in low light. This aint true. It clearly isn't as good as those cameras it went againts (most) but it's as good as the 5Dll and better than film. What happened? The 5Dll came out and was everyone's (not mine) low light darling (kicking the Red One's buttocks). Everyone was raving about it and holding up their noses. But now...because newer cameras with even better low light abilities come out....does that make this camera's image...um..."garbage?" C'mon people. It is what it is.

So what's going to happen a year from now when there are even newer and better performing camera's in low light. Will the FS100/F3/C300 be considered garbage?

And then there's this issue with noise. It's (GH-2) a noisy camera when compared to others...I guess. But...um...35mm film is noisy. From what I understand professional colorists clean up their image on 35mm in post as well. When done right those Hollywood features (for the most part) look stellar. What's wrong with a little post work? These digital cinema cameras are so freaking clean (like the Alexa for example) that I've seen many examples where they've spent many $$$'s adding noise to the image. WTH? If anything you can tell when watching digital cinema (yes...even the Alexa).

C300 looks like a noisy camera. But that I think will work in its favor. I really really hope they can dial that in camera sharpening down though.

We complain to dang much.

proaudio4

@Ian_T "C300 looks like a noisy camera. But that I think will work in its favor. I really really hope they can dial that in camera sharpening down though."

I thought the same thing... Odd, I have not heard about this from others. Someone I know (who owns RED ONE and EPIC) has been contemplating whether to buy the C300. I mentioned the footage (in this example) looked harsh from the excessive edge enhancement. If that's the quality with no sharpening, it's not good. He's now considering the Nikon D4. And no, not due to this one example > He also felt that for $20,000 it should of had 1080 60P and 4:4:4 10bit out like the F3.

Of course the C300 smokes the GH2 (and most other cameras) in many ways.... But who really cares. This test gives us the info we already knew:

The Gh2 has decent resolution and image quality.

The GH2 has a smaller sensor; thus it's not as good as cameras with larger sensors in lower light.

We knew this before. Nothings changed. The GH2 produces excellent looking video for a $800 camera.

werd

rockroadpix

I guess I'm crazy, but I like to shoot stuff that is exposed within a half stop of perfecto. Makes life so much easier.

DrDave

It is easier when it is truly perfecto, when you you have a blown highlight then it is perfecto with a "u".

spacewig

@DrDave

Hahaha, perfecto with a "u", lol

Clermond

@brianluce Sorry I didn't know this - har har har

WhiteRabbit

"u" hahaha

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Tags in Topic

Top Posters